argument 107 渔船与娱乐船 找到两个错误 别的点不知道是不是跑题了

天晴了UID: 201592

107  The following appeared in an editorial in the Seatown newspaper. 【107】
"Seatown has a large port exclusively for fishing boats, whose owners pay fees for the upkeep of the docks and for facilities for cleaning engines and repairing nets. In recent years, declining fish populations have decreased fishing revenue and forced many owners to stop fishing altogether. As a result, the port has a high vacancy rate and port managers are considering allowing pleasure boats, including cruise ships and other large vessels, to use the port in order to increase revenue. But allowing pleasure boats into the port would be a mistake, because the fishing boats would be forced out of the port. We should preserve the port for the fishing fleet, which, unlike pleasure boats, contributes to the prosperity of Seatown."
Seatown拥有一个专供渔船使用的港口，渔船的拥有者缴纳一定的费用来维护码头以及用于清洁引擎和维修渔网的设施。近年来，捕鱼人数的下降导致渔业收入减少，并迫使很多渔船拥有者停止捕鱼。这导致港口有大量空位，港口管理者正在考虑允许娱乐船只包括游轮和其他大型船只使用港口来增加收入。但允许娱乐船只进入港口将会是一个错误，因为这将迫使渔船离开港口。我们应该为渔船保留港口，渔船与娱乐船只不同，它们为Seatown带来了繁荣。


1. Allowing pleasure boats use the port doesn’t mean that fishing boats will be forced out of the port.
2. Pleasure boats can also contributes to the prosperity of Seatown.

大家怎么看?

猫猫624UID: 171232

感觉你找的两个都对.另外可以加preserving fishing does not necessaily contribute to the prosperity of Seatown.

我今天正好看这里,写了一下107.有空的话欢迎讨论

imjasonUID: 176604

记得精华区里有个关于242道题目的详细错误分析，你要是没看到，我整理了传给你了

goodgoodstudyUID: 201753

我觉得 还有一个问题就是 并没有任何的提示告诉你 渔场是否与繁荣有必然联系
这个根源问题还是值得一驳的

西西UID: 196939

捕鱼人数下降，会导致渔业收入减少是不假，可是怎么会force别的 渔船拥有者停止捕鱼？没有必然联系吧。是不是呢？